Sentences with phrase «who accept things»

People who accept things on faith, without evidence, won't be swayed by evidence.

The brain chemistry of a dog who responds to every stranger or novel object as a terrifying threat is fundamentally different from a dog who accepts these things in stride.

Not exact matches

As a student of human behavior who tries to understand why we do the things that we do (often to no avail), I've had to accept that sometimes there just isn't any explanation for why that person just did that really weird thing.

The most wonderful thing about this change in me is that I am able to accept people for who they are now and who they will become, mostly because I've accepted myself — and who I am now and who I will become.

Conferences attract plenty of people who are doing the same thing, and once you accept that, you'll probably discover that going to events for entrepreneurs is one of the most helpful things you can do for your business.

«If you are a conservative talk show host, which I am, if you don't accept that it's likely Hillary Clinton has taken part in multiple murders, or that Barack Obama is a Muslim extremist sympathizer who was probably born outside this country — if you don't accept those two things, it's almost as if you're a sellout.

Suffice it to say, opinion is, um, varied when it comes to cryptocurrencies and Bitcoin in particular, as is who supports it and who thinks it's the worst thing to hit trade since COD and damns them as well as uses and accepts them.

In this view of the world, markets stop falling on bad news because everyone who is still in accepts things are bad.

However, those who don't accept the gift of Christ will probably miss out on great things in this life and the next.

The last thing I want before I die is somebody I don't know and who does not know me telling me I am going to hell unless I accept Jesus or whatever.

No... essentially, God is the collective wild imagination of a bunch of scientifically ignorant humans who lived thousands of years ago and had absolutely no understanding of the world around them, so the only way they could possibly accept the way things were was to invent something that controlled any natural mechanism they didn't understand.

I guess I am a wolf then... certainly not one of the flock who follows where led... but i commend you on attempting to peal back the layers... We should all be like that... not accepting things at face value.

I am looking for authenticity, relevancy, no ovewhelming bands that take away from the experience of worship, clergy who are willing to answer my hard questions, who understand doubt is a stepping stone to deepening my belief, who accept everyone as Jesus did (and we know Jesus was a rebel who accepted and led all sorts of people), who don't feel the need to try to be hip, who speak about things without inserting politics, who are wiling to trash the temple to bring us back to the truth, who will step out of the box of comfort and be real.

Lisa, I did write» It is I who created the destroyer to work havoc» We are talking of the same thing here, accepting Jesus and being saved from the coming wrath of God.

On the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood Web Site, Wayne Grudem warns that if Christians accept egalitarianism, «we will begin to have whole churches who no longer «tremble» at the Word of God (Isaiah 66:2), and who no longer live by «every word that comes from the mouth of God» (Matthew 4:4), but who pick and choose the things they like and the things they don't like in the Bible.»

They have been losing the same thing as men who are forced to accept women as equal and give up their gender - based privileges.

They have been losing the same thing as whites who are forced to accept blacks as equals and give up their race - based privileged.

There are those who are constitutionally disposed to accept things and to whom the blue waters never call, and there are those who must understand or perish and who must ever adventure on the uncharted seas of thought.

As a person who believes in God, I will say this; faith explains the importance of accepting that we do not know or understand things beyond our brains.

The Christian who, having accepted the communist regime in the U.S.S.R., protests the violence of that regime, should be «all things to all men» — not to show that a Christian will acquiesce in anything whatever, but to lead some of his compatriots to Christ; that is, in this connection, lead them to renounce violence.

But the most amazing thing to me is that there are people who think that the universe is too complicated to exist without having been created, and yet accept that there is a God who exists without having been created, and yet who is more complicated than the universe!

Any person who does this I can respect whatever conclusion they reach, it's the people who have always been one thing or another and their cognitive dissonance and absolute refusal to accept disbelief in god as an alternative in any capacity that I have beef with.

I wish people would accept that the «Bible» is not gods word neither was it wrote by god but by men who put what they decided they wanted as rules for everyone else to run their life based on, every thing from what type of fabric you can wear at the same time to what you can eat on certain days.

Since there is only one God, idols are nothing; so long as the Christians offered thanksgiving to God for the meat, they could accept it without any qualms of conscience, as a gift from the hand of the One who opens His hand to satisfy the desires of every living thing.

God now accepts behavior that was unthinkable and yet, if you ask any person who believes in their specific god, they'll all tell you that he (maybe the one thing that hasn't changed is his gender) is eternal.

Jeremy Myers, i think you are wrong and David is right, so many out there are preaching you can live any way you want and be right that Grace covers any sin, they really believe that, that is not what the bible says, God was very concerned about sin so much he sent Jesus his son to die on a cross for us, if we accept Jesus as our savor then we are to obey his commandments, not break them, we are to live a righteous and holy life as possible, the bible plainly list a whole list of things if we live in will not to to heaven unless we repent, if we die while in these sins, we will not go to heaven, what is the difference, between someone who said a prayer and someone who did not, and they are living the same way, none, i think, if we are truly saved it should be hard to do these things let alone live and do them everyday, i would be afraid to tell people that it does not matte grace covers their sins, i really think it is the slip ups that we are convicted of by the Holy Spirit and we ask for forgivness, how can anyones heart be right with God and they have sex all the time out of marriage, lie, break every commandment of God, i don't think this is meaning grace covers those sins, until they repent and ask for forgiveness, a lot of people will end up in hell because preachers teach Grace the wrong way,, and those preachers will answer to God for leading these people the wrong way, not saying you are one of them, but be careful, everything we teach or preach must line up with the word of God, God hates sin,

It is as if there is almost three tiers of religion M. Scott Peck speaks about this in some of his writings, the bottom tier are those who blindly accept, the middle level is composed of those who came to reject the things they accepted blindly, and the final tier of enlightenment is those who have gone through all the hard questions, accepting nothing blindly, yet eventually find God.

God is the God who has done these things; God is the God who has accepted his people in their covenant with him made after their deliverance; God is the God who can never be understood as existing save seen as related to, and worshipped as the One who is their God.

To exalt him as a great thinker, as though he could take delight in being praised for having honed his mental tools very sharp, no matter what they cut; to speak admiringly of him as an excellent orator, as though adeptness in the use of images were an enviable thing, no matter what they imaged; to do him reverence as a great student who learned from Newton and Locke and the Platonists, from nature itself, no matter what he learned — to honor him thus is to do him no honor that he could accept — or which, accepting, he would not thereafter bitterly rue.

Before I state it, however, I must say that there is no reason why the more traditional position, both about life beyond death as a subjective (and hence personal) reality for each of us and also with respect to the traditional portrayal of the «last things» (including an intermediate state), may not be accepted by those who find it compelling.

For anyone who is not already predisposed to believing that the imaginary is real, if his attention is called to the distinction between reality and imagination and he is explicitly reminded that the imaginary is not real, he's not likely to accept claims about imaginary things as truth.

Do we have anything to say to «Christian» parents who are about to or already have thrown out their kids because they're gay, on drugs, having sex or doing other things the parents do not accept?

I'm still working all this out in my head, but as a woman who has grown to accept her ambitious spirit rather than resist it (perhaps because of my upbringing, perhaps because of Dan's influence and support, perhaps because of that whole Enneagram Type 1 thing), I offer just a few observations that I hope we can discuss further in the comment section:

One of the things I have respected most in Aida Rosa, principal of the elementary school P.S. 30, and the teachers that I talk with on her staff is that they look at children here as children, not as «distorted children,» not as «morally disabled children,» not as «quasi-children» who require a peculiar arsenal of reconstructive strategies and stick - and - carrot ideologies that wouldn't be accepted for one hour by the parents or the teachers of the upper middle class.

We do more than «accept» Jesus in that process, we make a personal covenant with the God who made us that acknowledges that we are sinners, born into sin and if we'd been Adam, we'd have done the same thing.

I think the only thing that will really be invitational, missional, relational, and humble, particularly when coming from people who have no personal experience with the issue, will be to accept gay Christians for who they are and accept their choice to be either partnered or celibate.

«17 The poor in spirit are those who have accepted the loss of all things including their own selves for his sake.

(It is man, influenced by other men, who twisted things around to mean what they do now; it is man, influenced by other men, who inspired the change from accepting Universal Restoration / Reconciliation as truth to accepting Eternal Torment or Permanent Annihilation as truth instead.)

It is the human who love to innovate things by using the «free will» and here also greediness of power and supremacy that no one wants to discover or accept the truth...

There's a promise of good things for those who accept on blind faith, but also the promise of torture for those who do not.

The statistics are merely sets of data measured in a specific context and at least the person who posted them had the respect to allow us to make our own interpretation rather than inserting his own opinion which is what Buddha actually wanted people to do... not just accept things on blind faith but interpret for themselves and experience for themselves.

What must the case really be, so far as we today can grasp it, if people who thought and wrote and naturally accepted such and such ideas put things in the way in which they did put them?

Third, the minister can arrange for him to get acquainted with an experienced and accepting AA member who may serve as a bridge to feeling at home in an AA group [In a study of factors which produce «readiness» for affiliation with AA, Harrison M. Trice discovered that alcoholics with the following characteristics tend to relate effectively to AA: Before contact with AA, they often shared troubles with others, had lost drinking friends, had heard positive things about AA, had no relative or friend who had quit through willpower.

The thing is that I think Brene is on to something here about how we need to embrace and accept our areas of imperfections, because they make us who we really are, and they are not imperfections at all, but are simply projections on ourselves from what we think other people want us to be.

If you find someone trying to find their way back home, the natural thing to do is to be warm welcoming, open your arms and say «Brother, we accept you for who you are and what you're going through.

What did the last things mean to men and women who accepted the scheme quite literally or with this or that reservation or re-interpretation?

Though He did not cause the pain and suffering (nor was it an accident on His part), because He is the Creator God who made the universe as it is, He accepts responsibility for how things have turned out, says He is sorry for what we are going through, and begs our forgiveness.

I hope that what is said about these topics will illustrate the fashion in which other aspects of Christian thought would be handled by one who accepts the Process way of seeing things.

Who is misled, misinformed, and softly wooed into simple acceptance of the status quo, into accepting the way things are, into believing that things can never be changed — that the poor will continue to get poorer and the rich richer.

The beliefs are just so far out there for me, that whenever I see someone in ardent support of them I have to think they're a troll, because I don't know how they could possibly believe or accept that (there are a few exceptions of people who pt things very well, cite supporting evidence, and are consistent and coherent - I don't agree with them, but I can at least understand what they're saying)